Skip to main content

tv   Green Party Nominee Jill Stein Holds News Conference  CSPAN  August 28, 2016 1:37pm-2:31pm EDT

1:37 pm
november 8 and create the future our children deserve together. we will make america strong again. together, we will make america wealthy again. which we have to do. together, we will make america united again. we will make america safe again. we will make america great again, greater than ever before. thank you thank you very much. , thank you, joni ernst. ♪ [rolling stones, you can't always get what you want]
1:38 pm
>> ♪ you can't always get what you want you can't always get what you want you can't always get what you want but if you try sometimes you might find you get what you need ♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> c-span continues on the road to the white house. hillary clinton: we need serious right leadership. -- serious leadership. donald trump: we will make america great again. announcer: ahead is the presidential and vice presidential debates on c-span, the radio app and c-span.org. monday, september 26 is the first presidential debate from hofstra university. and on tuesday november running november 24, the vice
1:39 pm
presidential debate. the secondmber 29, taking place at the university of nevada-las vegas october 18. the debates on c-span, listen live on the free radio app or watch anytime on-demand at c-span.org. >> green party presidential nominee jill stein talks to reporters at a conference at the national press club in washington dc. she discussed a range of issues as one of her efforts to be involved in national debate. this is just under an hour. >> welcome to the jill stein for president campaign.
1:40 pm
press club reporting, my name is melissa figaro up, i am the press reporter for the campaign. we are starting in just a moment. are there any quick questions before we begin in terms of press or logistics? no, ok great. without further i do, fresh from baton rouge, louisisana where we were witnessing the damage from the flooding and helping to recover, he was green party presidential nominee jill stein. thanks very much. and thank you all so much for being here today. i really appreciate your attention to these very critical issues that are converging now in baton rouge, louisiana, but which are really symptomatic of a crisis across the country.
1:41 pm
so, first, i just want to say a quick word about baton rouge and in particular denham springs, where we've just returned from. and we had the honor of being escorted through some of the most -- most tragically struck areas of baton rouge, where essentially there has been no recovery and almost nothing in the way of services. from the point of view of the residents in denham springs, at least in the neighborhood that we were able to see, this is another case of very unequal recovery. in fact, one of the residents of the shelter that we visited was actually a displaced person from katrina and from new orleans, who had never been able to return to new orleans because the recovery there was also a case of unequal recovery. and their feeling was that the
1:42 pm
services on the part of fema and on the part of the nonprofits just weren't coming to their neighborhood, whether you were talking about help gutting their homes, food relief, services with laundry, just to be able to wash their filthy materials, and just help trying to salvage their precious memories and lifetime positions. we saw out on the street not only furniture, bedding, cabinets, walls, and so on but the mementos of their lives and of their children, including sports trophies and photos and things of that sort. so this was clearly a very wrenching moment for them. they felt incredible strength and courage from the generosity of the community.
1:43 pm
one of the women we spoke to there had been staying in a neighbor's house who had taken in 22 people that were displaced on their street. and we were hosted there by the louisiana green party and their connections to some of the impacted people and also to many of the non-profit groups, including together baton rouge, north baton rouge disaster relief, the mutual aid disaster relief, and also 510 denham springs, which is a gofundme effort to help support some of the neighbors trying to salvage their homes. also, yeah, those were the main groups we were working with. and their resilience and their strength and their optimism was really incredible. it is of interest that the shoulder we visited, the l.m.
1:44 pm
lockhart center, was not an official shelter, because there aren't enough official shelters to go around. the shelter, was housing -- really a community center -- was housing 12 families including some who had previously been displaced in katrina, as i mentioned. and it's also of interest that one of the people who helped get that shelter going was general honore, who was the -- in charge of the federal relief effort. the state or federal military who had come in and finally had brought order to the new orleans relief effort, and here he was kind of doing the same thing on a smaller scale in baton rouge. and as you probably know, there are something like 100,000 people who have filed for federal relief, and that many of the people -- most of the people, i think, were not
1:45 pm
covered by insurance because this wasn't a flood zone. so just looking at the larger sense of this, we have a climate emergency that is really taking place in the headlines all over the country right now. both the floods which aren't limited only to louisiana but we've seen recent floods in arizona, in west virginia, in texas. we are seeing 500-year, some people call them 1,000-year floods from these extremely heavy rains that are undoubtedly related to climate change. any one storm cannot be definitively pegged to climate change, but when you see so many at such extreme levels there's no question according to the scientists that this is a consequence of warmer air that holds much more water, and when
1:46 pm
it's triggered to downpour, it really flows. and as you know, it's not just the floods, it's also the drought, the heat waves that we've seen across much of the country, and the fires on the west coast, which, at last count , had displaced -- what was it, some 82,000 people had been evacuated as of last week. and then in addition, there are these growing warnings about sea level rise, according to james hansen, the foremost climate scientist, they -- he is predicting meters-worth, that is yards-worth -- not one yard but many yards' worth of sea level rise as soon as 50 years from now. and that of course would be an absolutely devastating sea level rise that would essentially wipe out coastal population centers,
1:47 pm
including the likes of manhattan and florida and so on, and actually all over the world, the entire country of bangladesh. so this is not something we want to continue to be charging headlong towards, and we know that even under the so-called "all of the above" climate plan of the obama administration, that greenhouse gases have not just been rising, but the rate of rise has actually been accelerating. so this is why, you know, we call for essentially declaring a climate state of emergency, recognizing that we are facing civilization-threatening events now, and the time window to prevent them is closing rapidly. this isn't something that can wait 50 years. if we're going to stop it, we need to stop now because there's a long delay in the impact of
1:48 pm
those greenhouse gases, even the ones that are already there. and this -- i'll talk about our solution, i'll summarize it very briefly in a moment. but i just want to point out early here that this underscores why we think an open debate is absolutely critical in this election. there will otherwise not be a candidate who is not taking money from the lobbyists, the corporations, super-pacs, et cetera. we're the only such campaign that is not compromised by the power of big money, the big banks, the fossil fuel giants, the war profiteers. we are the only clean people-powered campaign in this election, so we have the unique ability to actually tell the truth here, not only about climate change, about the endless and expanding wars that are making us less secure, not more secure, while they cost us over half of our discretionary
1:49 pm
budget and about half of your income taxes. yet, we only make the terrorist threat bigger with each turn of the cycle of violence. so there are a number of interrelated issues here where we have the unique ability to tell the truth in an election where we are seeing just unprecedented realignment with the republican party essentially unraveling at the seams, with many prominent republicans now supporting hillary clinton, with hillary clinton appealing to the republicans to come into her big tent, with her transition director being one of the lobbyists' lobbyists who is very close to the fossil fuel industry, supports the keystone pipeline, supports the trans- pacific partnership, et cetera. you know, we think there's a clear signal here of the democratic party continuing to move to the right, leaving not only the bernie sanders supporters out in the cold, but
1:50 pm
so much of the american public at a time when polls tell us that over half of americans, something like 57%, are very dissatisfied with their two choices. a recent ap-norc poll about a month ago found that 13% of the american public was satisfied with the two-party approach to the presidential election, 13% that are satisfied. so we think at a time when we are facing really critical issues in an election where we're not just deciding what kind of a world we will have, but whether we will have a world or not going forward, we think it's really critical now more than ever that we have open debate and actually put more choices in front of the american people who are clamoring for those choices. and then just a quick word about a solution here to this crisis. and essentially, we're saying we've got to declare this state of emergency that we have.
1:51 pm
and that emergency is compounded by existing racial disparities and economic disparities that put the most vulnerable on the front lines of the climate crisis as well as on the front lines of the economic crisis. so we call for a joint solution that solves these two problems. the economic recovery has come to those on the top but not to most americans, particularly younger americans who have essentially been hung out to dry here in a system in which they are held hostage by staggering levels of debt that are unpayable in the current economy and that have the climate crisis essentially exploding on their watch. so we call for a solution here that addresses both the economic and the climate crisis. we call it a green new deal. so it's not a hypothetical, it's based on something we actually did in the great depression that helped us get out of it.
1:52 pm
and that is an emergency jobs program that would create 20 million jobs, ensuring that every american who can work and wants to work has a decent paying job, a living wage job as part of this emergency mobilization, which we also call a wartime scale mobilization. when pearl harbor was bombed at the outset of the second world war, for the united states, it took us six months, all of six months to massively mobilize our economy. we went from 0% on a wartime footing to 25% on a wartime footing of gdp in the course of six months. so clearly we can do this. we can mobilize, and we're calling for 100% clean renewable energy by 2030 which is what the science tells us is exactly what we need if we are to hold
1:53 pm
temperature rise to below 1.5 degrees centigrade and essentially turn the tide on climate change. we would be creating jobs, particularly in the areas of clean renewable energy, that is wind, water, sun conservation and efficiency, but also in the area of healthy and sustainable local food production, because that's a major component of green house gasses. and also public transportation that is energy efficient, renewably-powered, and that dovetails with what we call recreational transportation. we have a right to recreation as a form of transportation. that is safe bike paths and sidewalks so that we can actually use our muscle power as part as how we get to transit hubs. now, the good news about this is that it not only restarts the economy, it turns the tide on climate change. it also makes the wars for oil
1:54 pm
obsolete when you have 100% clean renewable energy for the foreseeable future. so therein is how it pays for itself, through two mechanisms. and the first i'll mention has actually been articulated in very detailed engineering studies, how we get so much healthier, and i can say this under authority as a medical doctor. we get so much healthier when we do away with the air pollution and its various sequela into our water and into our aquatic food chain and so on. when we do away with those fossil fuel exposures which, by the way, cause 200,000 premature deaths in this country every year, 200,000 and make major contributions to the epidemic of asthma, to heart attacks, to strokes, and to cancer. so when you actually do the numbers on this, and you look at
1:55 pm
the contribution of fossil fuels to this public health burden, it turns out we get so much healthier when we zero out fossil fuels. that our savings in health care expenditures is actually enough to pay the cost of the transition over approximately a decade and a half according to one of the prominent studies, here. so it's, it pays for itself in terms of health benefits, but also if you then factor in the reductions in our military expenditures, our bloated and dangerous military, which is not making us safer but demonstrably less safe, if we cut that -- less safe, if we cut that military budget, that too puts hundreds of billions of dollars into the money that we need in order to undertake this green, new deal. so essentially, it is a win-win-win for our economy, for our climate, for our health and another one, for peace and international security.
1:56 pm
a couple other just real quick mentions, we also call for a just transition that ensures both workers in the industry and communities like in coal country, for example, that they will not lose jobs until those jobs are replaced, or there will be transition support. as the state of new york, for example, adopted recently in their phasing out of their coal plants, they assured their workers of comparable financial and -- financial support and benefit coverage for a period of two years. we would be looking at a longer period than two years. and yeah -- and that's -- you know, i'll leave it at that, and open it up to your questions. just underscoring that we're really at a critical moment of transition here on the climate, as well as on related issues including global conflicts which very often are related in fact
1:57 pm
to access to fossil fuels and their roots of transportation. so we're at a, you know, at a -- you know, kind of a hail mary moment here where we very critically need to change course. we need to have an open and honest discussion about what we're actually facing, particularly our younger generation which has been held hostage not only by a predatory economy, a predatory system of student loans and public higher education, but also by the full wave of the climate crisis that is falling on their heads. and i would mention, by the way, that the number of young people who are locked into student loan debt, which is essentially unpayable for most people, and it's not just young people. it's now well into middle age. that's 43 million people trapped by student loan debt. that right there is enough to win a three-way presidential race, because 43 million is a plurality in the presidential vote.
1:58 pm
that's a lot of people who could be mobilized. so when i'm asked, well, you know, aren't you just going to spoil the election? i make the point that, you know, we're looking at some pretty serious stuff here. the american people are at a unique moment in history. we have never had such a majority support for truly transformative change. the american people are unhappy, distrust and dislike the two major party presidential candidates. this is not a time for the political pundits and the party operatives to be telling the american people to be good little boys and girls and just keep voting for the same two parties that have demonstrably thrown people under the bus. we think it's really important for us to have that open conversation. and for my campaign and actually gary johnson's campaign, to be on the ballot. there are four candidates -- i'm sorry -- to be in the debates. there are four candidates in this election that will be on the ballot for just about every american voters.
1:59 pm
in america, we have a right not only to our vote. we have a right to know who it is that we can vote for. i'll open it up there. thank you very much. >> questions? >> dave [indiscernible] washington post. you are taking public financing. every other major candidate has pulled out of that system. it seems to be collapsing. one, why would you say the green party is entitled to public financing? because it's not gotten that much support in previous elections. and two, would you favor expanding the matching limit? i mean, there's a proposal in congress to make it six to one for each dollar. jill stein: i think you could bounce that question to the american people. do they think we should just have the same -- the same two? you know, they're screaming no. and, you know, we're seeing the republican party unravel, and we're seeing the democratic party move to the right. we have one demo/republican big corporate party right now. and the american people are tired of being thrown under the bus.
2:00 pm
they are sick of a rigged economy, and they're sick of the rigged political system that delivers it. yes, i would say absolutely. and you know, what we call for is not simply expanding the ceiling for public funding. we're talking about publicly funded elections, period. our democracy is too important to be privatized and put into the hands of big money, either big money donors or big money candidates. one should not be able to buy influence in our democracy at a time when we are -- i mean, ever, but especially now, when we're really looking our mortality in the face here, whether you're looking at the consequences of blow-back from these catastrophic wars, whether you're looking at the climate meltdown, the next, you know, the next meltdown of our economy, which continues to teeter on the brink. the banks are bigger than ever and more prone to fail as ever. and, you know, just look at the new nuclear arms race, where barack obama basically said $3
2:01 pm
trillion on a whole new generation of nuclear weapons. we should be in the process or rapidly, you know, disbanding, retiring all nuclear weapons and joining what looks to be coming out of the united nations now, which is a new, a call essentially to ban nuclear weapons. the other nations of the world are now beginning to move outside of the nuclear nations who have neglected their responsibility to move towards disarmament for too long. so, you know, that's the bandwagon that we need to get on. >> next question? >> steven olemacher with the a.p. what do you make of a presidential campaign that has in many ways devolved into just a contest of personalities, as opposed to a discussion of the issues? donald trump: -- jill stein: i think it speaks volumes about what's happened to our political system. you know, and this didn't just happen overnight. this is really where we've been going. and now we see it kind of at a new horrifying extreme, where, you know, the news becomes the
2:02 pm
transitions inside of the trump campaign. you know, really? is that what we're talking about in this election? you know, changes of staff? you know, we, we have, you know, our future is imperiled right now. and there are more important things for us to be talking about. i think personally, you know, as someone who has struggled with this system for many years, first as a physician, you know, and then as a physician recognizing that we were not going to cure what ails us inside of this very sick political system that if we want , to, you know, fix the things that are literally threatening life, limb and survival even, you know, we, we need to heal our very pathological political system. and you know, i think in this election, we're seeing that, that political system reach its logical conclusion. you know, it is bought and paid for by big interests. we saw it in the sanders campaign.
2:03 pm
you know, they could, they could raise up a principled agenda, but it was sabotaged like every other principled rebel in the democratic party over the past many decades. they're allowed to be seen and heard for a little while and then they get taken down and essentially disappeared, you know, and in this case, disappeared out of the democratic convention. bernie sanders was relegated to a footnote, and then we saw the e-mails, of course, about how the dnc had been working in collusion with hillary's staff and with some members of the big media, you know, to sort of tilt the playing field in that direction. so you know, this is a systemic problem, and i think the disgust that the american people are feeling right now has really reached breakthrough proportions. this is a realignment election. everyday people are looking for a new political voice that's not part of this compromised demo-republican party. and i'd say hold on to your hat, there is a critical conversation that is waiting to be held.
2:04 pm
and once it begins, i think all bets are off about where it goes. >> if that's -- what you say is true, why aren't you doing better? jill stein: well, it may have something to do with the fact that according to the new york times -- this is now about three months ago -- donald trump had gotten $2 billion worth of free media, hillary clinton had gotten $1 billion of free media, and bernie sanders had about half as much. and we've had essentially zero up until this past week when we have, you know, five minutes here and there, with the exception of the cnn town hall where we were trending number one on twitter. so, you know, i would say every indication is that people are really hungry for more. polls show right now that very few people have even heard of our campaign. and if they've heard of it, they have no idea what it represents. so you know, i'd say to those who think that our campaign is too, you know, too sort of
2:05 pm
uninteresting to the american public, you know -- try us. you know, let us -- let us have that exposure out there. bring us into a debate, and let's see what happens. >> next. two questions in terms of your practical hurdles. one is, the commission on presidential debates, and their 15% criteria based on corporate polls. and secondly, isn't part of the -- sam husseini with vote pack.org. jill stein: thank you. >> isn't part of the issue that some people who agree with you are effectively driving down your numbers? i mean, noam chomsky is basically telling people climate change -- the very issue that you talked about -- "trump is a climate denier, you've got to vote for clinton in so-called swing states." how do you get past that hurdle
2:06 pm
when people who presumably agree with you on the issues are effectively driving down your numbers? jill stein: so let me take that in two pieces. first about the commission on presidential debates. you know, the league of women voters when they quit, and the commission came in and basically took over, the league of women voters quit because they said this is a fraud being perpetrated on the american public. basically because of the inordinate power of the commission, which is essentially representatives of the democratic and republican parties, it's the two parties essentially controlling the debates in order to silence political opposition. you know, so this is not what democracy looks like in the first place. but they quit, the league quit, saying that the commission had essentially granted themselves the power to control the questioning because of their control over the questioner, control over the candidates who were eligible, and control over
2:07 pm
the audience so that they could create the illusion that there's popular support for things like more corporate tax breaks, or the trans-pacific partnership, or these expanding wars. you know they can basically , create, you know, the movie to make it look like there's popular support. so we consider the commission illegitimate. it is not a public commission , and its name is very deceptive. and we think that 15% is a disservice to the american public, especially at a time when people are saying that they are extremely unhappy with the two choices and with the two political parties in the presidential election. we think that there should be another basis for inclusion, and that is the right of voters to know about who their choices are, and that any candidate who's on the ballot in enough states that they could numerically win the election, voters have a right to know about those candidates.
2:08 pm
and we will -- you know, we have challenged in a court of law, without great expectations that that was going to go anywhere, and it hasn't, but there's still the court of public opinion. in my home state, in massachusetts, we have been able to fight our way into debates, actually in which i did very well, and the public had enormous resonance with what they heard, and then i was yanked out of the debates because it became clear that our public interest point of view is a grave threat to the political establishment. but there are tools and strategies that we will be using. thousands of people are signing up, and i encourage anyone who's interested to go to jill2016.com and sign up to be a part of the campaign to open the debates. i don't think the american people are going to take this one sitting down. in the last election, my running mate and i were arrested simply for trying to get into the grounds of the college where a debate was being held, and i
2:09 pm
think there will be, you know in , the future we won't be going alone. >> in terms of people driving down your numbers -- jill stein: ok, yes. well, this politics of fear, that tells you you have to vote against what you're afraid of rather than for what you truly believe -- so, noam chomsky has supported me in my home state you know, when he felt safe to do so. i think it's fair to say my agenda is far closer to his than hillary clinton, but he subscribes to the politics of fear. and you know, maybe there's a generational difference here, but i think young people growing up today do not see the democratic party as the party of the new deal. they also don't see it as the party that's going to save us. they see it as the party of fracking, they see it as the party of opening up the arctic, that pushed for the trans- pacific pipeline until they were forced by the grassroots to stop. they see it as the party of expanding wars and drone
2:10 pm
assassinations. they see it as the party of immigrant deportations, and detentions, and night raids. so donald trump says terrifying things. hillary clinton actually has an extremely troubling record from leading the charge into the catastrophe of libya to saying, "send them home" to the children fleeing the violence in latin america which she herself had a hand in by giving the thumbs up to the coup in honduras, ushering in that incredible violence from which, you know tens of thousands are fleeing. , one of the major influxes of refugees. so you know -- and hillary has been a major proponent of fracking around the world. and now has just appointed ken salazar, you know, the best friend of fracking, to her transition team. so the climate is not looking so good under a hillary clinton administration.
2:11 pm
and coal is terrible, but the science on fracking says that it's probably just as bad. it's not ok to open up an entirely new generation of infrastructure now that's going to wed us to fracking for another 20, 30 or 40 years. it is basically, you know curtains the minute we do that. , so i think there are many people now who take a different point of view and who recognize that the politics of fear delivered everything we were afraid of. all the reasons you were told to vote for the lesser evil, because you didn't want the meltdown of the climate, the expanding wars, the offshoring of our jobs -- all those things, all those reasons we were given to vote for the lesser evil is exactly what we've gotten. democracy needs a moral compass. it's not enough to vote against, we need an affirmative agenda. especially at a time when there are enough people that we can actually drive that agenda forward. we could potentially win this race. i'm not holding my breath but i'm not ruling it out. this is a crazy election, it's not over till it's over.
2:12 pm
>> jason calvi with the ewtn and the global catholic network. i want to get your -- i want to get your thoughts on the -- you've mentioned access of money and accessing politicians. what are your thoughts on the latest batch of hillary clinton e-mails in the state department? what do those reveal about access? what do you think about that? and what should americans be thinking about that? jill stein: exactly. i mean, i think it's not a coincidence that, you know, that hillary has the numbers that she has, as one of the most untrusted presidential candidates ever. and the more we see of what went on in the secretary of state's office, which hillary attempted to cover up, you know, to sort of take off the record, by using her private server. i mean, this is sort of the elephant in the room around the private server. why did she put national security information and the
2:13 pm
names of cia secret agents -- why were they put at risk? she was clear about this. and the inspector general's report about the e-mails actually makes this point, that this wasn't a mistake. this was by intention. and hillary told her staff she did not want her personal business to be accessible to foia, for example. but this is the really disturbing thing: where did her personal family financial business end, and where did the official business of the state begin? to me, the mere fact that half of her e-mails, half of the volume and the number of her e-mails, she classified as private. if someone is on the job, and half of their e-mails are for their private affairs, there's something wrong here. you know, either the private is, you know, leaking over into the
2:14 pm
public, or someone is doing their own private business on company time. so, you know, to my mind, the continuing revelations about the influence of the clinton campaign donors, the special deals that they got, the lucrative favors, the weapons deals, for example, to saudi arabia, who we're now seeing, you know, all else aside, but just looking at yemen alone, the incredible war crimes being committed by saudi arabia with our weapons, not to mention our assistance, this is really a national scandal. and the fact that money was flowing to the clinton foundation as these very regrettable and harmful decisions were being made, i think, regardless of the legality, this just raises serious questions about judgment and character that, in my view, are just not compatible with someone that you want to trust as the leader of the country.
2:15 pm
thank you. >> hi. dana milbank with the washington post segment of the corporate media. so, i have a conundrum i want to present to you. so, i could write about today, and others could report here about what an important issue climate change is. and we'd publish it or broadcast it. and the fact is very few people will read it, and they're going to go read or view stories about trump's staff machinations or clinton's e-mails. so i'm not sure the issue is necessarily a corporate media, but what people are demanding. why is that? what's the -- what's the way around that, if there is one? jill stein: well, let me say, we've seen this problem get worse. you know, worse and worse. i think it's a multi-factor problem. but what we do know is that when
2:16 pm
we had greater diversity of candidate opinion, there is an opportunity to have a more diverse discussion. right now, so many people are tuned out of the election and out of the political system in general because they are accustomed to being ignored by that system, and because, you know, not only ignored by the discussion, but ignored by the agenda. the agenda really, you know -- was bernie sanders tuned out? i don't think so. you know, i think he had more attention from the american public than just about anyone. at least from my point of view outside of the democratic party, it looked to me like he was, you know, the, you know, the guy saying that the emperor had no clothes. and everyone was agreeing with him, even trump supporters were agreeing with him. you know, remember that polls show that the majority of trump supporters are not motivated by supporting trump. they're motivated by not liking hillary clinton. so let's give them another
2:17 pm
choice besides donald trump as an alternative to hillary clinton. let's have a more diverse discussion. i think the more we have diverse media outlets, the better. the more that media has been consolidated, the harder it's been to have a truly diverse and open discussion. so those are some of the things that i would fix going forward. but i think it's not rocket science. we did have a very open discussion just a few months ago because we had a candidate who was engaging a whole other body of voters. and even that was very early in the campaign. as we get closer, i think the power of advocating for jobs, you know, for the right to a job, for canceling student debt, that's going to spread like a wildfire. we have -- now, you know, we're running between 4% and 6% even 7% in the polls prior to any big media coverage. that doesn't usually happen. why is that happening? you know, in my view that's because there is a generation here which is really desperate for another way forward.
2:18 pm
they're networked on the internet, and that word is getting out. if we could get to 4%, 5% and 6% without any coverage, i think all bets are off as to what will happen when we get into the debates. >> a question? >> down the ballot there are , going to be a lot of people voting who have you at the top of the ticket but don't have the green candidate for congress, a green candidate for governor, state, school board, et cetera. would you recommend they vote for one party in particular? if they're voting for you, what would advance the goals that you're running off of? jill stein: you know, i would say to look carefully at the candidate. you know -- and don't just look at what they say, because if you look at what they say, there's very little difference between , you know, according to some online candidate informational sites, there's not much difference between hillary clinton and myself. but you know, that's if you take what hillary clinton said as what hillary clinton will do rather than looking at hillary clinton's record. so i think it's really important
2:19 pm
to look at the record of the candidate, who's funding them, you know, the usual. but you'd be surprised how many green candidates there are actually running for congress, for senate, for state offices, for city councils, et cetera. we have a lot of down ballot candidates. and i would just say that, you know, if the black swan event were to happen, you know, in this age of black swans, and we wound up in the white house, i think we would find a lot of people ready to move with this agenda inside of the democratic party who feel like they've been held hostage by, you know, prevailing politics. yeah after what we , saw in the internal process both in the democratic and republican party, which suggests some type of internal crisis in both parties, one would think that, you know, that would be a
2:20 pm
good thing for, you know minor get --es like yours to to look more appealing to american voters. but that does not seem to be the case. how do you explain this -- i don't know, you call it irrational scenario? jill stein: yes, yes. i think it has a lot to do with the fact that people haven't heard about our campaigns, and they don't know who we are. the new york times did a study about two or three months ago, which i may have mentioned before before you came in i , think. that's all right. but it bears repeating that the -- at the time, months ago, donald trump had received $2 billion worth of free coverage, hillary clinton $1 billion, bernie sanders about half as much, and we had received essentially zip, yet we are still running 4% to 6% in the polls without any coverage, which is pretty unprecedented in our history. when we did -- when we had our
2:21 pm
first, you know, peek below the curtain or when the curtain came up briefly on cnn for a full hour -- actually longer than that -- town hall meeting last week, we were trending number one on twitter, we were number two on nielsen ratings. there was every indication that people were really hungering for more. >> what would you -- what would you think people being [indiscernible] to gain more appeal? jill stein: we are hoping to begin some more town hall meetings on primetime tv, to hold more townhall forums with myself and possibly with my running mate so that we can actually be seen and heard by the american public. right now, they don't have a clue who we are or even that we exist. i think the name of the game is all about empowering the american voter for what they are demanding right now, which is more voices and more choices. they don't like who they've got. so i think just by empowering the american voter to be the
2:22 pm
driver here in our democracy and in our election, you know, that's what we have to do. and you know, and let the chips fall where they may. but we've got to start with an inclusive and open democratic discussion. if we can't have it now, while we're looking at our mortality in the face, and the american people are saying this stinks, if we cannot change the discussion now, when in heaven's name are we ever going to change it? it has got to be now. >> two more questions, and then we'll go to closing remarks. jill stein: ok, great. if no one else [indiscernible] >> you mentioned how racial disparities play a role in who ends up at the front lines of the climate crisis. i was wondering if you could expand on that in relation to your experience in louisiana? jill stein: in louisiana? sure. i mean, louisiana was like -- what we saw was kind of like instant replay.
2:23 pm
and katrina, you know, -- in katrina, you know where so many , of those hit hardest, you know, were poor people and communities of color, neighborhoods of color. not only that they were hit hard, but that the relief didn't come. and even years later, the relief didn't come. so when i was there in new orleans for the 10 year anniversary, the numbers at that time reflected that about half of the african-american population had not been able to return even 10 years later because that's not where the rebuilding happened. it's not where the salvage happened. and we could see that in the neighborhood where we were walking and driving through, that these were largely families of color that were just helping each other and where volunteers were coming in. the green party was mobilizing from around the state to help people out because -- you know, because the needed relief just wasn't coming.
2:24 pm
so you know, people were very worried. and there, we were seeing refugees from katrina that were there in the shelter. and that shelter, by the way, was not even an official shelter, so it's not receiving support from fema. it's not getting drop-offs of supplies and food because it's not a recognized shelter. you know, and it wasn't just katrina, it was also super storm sandy where it was poor communities and african-american and latino communities that are, you know, really the first to get hit and the last to get helped. so we see really a compounding of a crisis of racial justice together with the crisis of the climate and the environment. so it's very important that we fix them both, and we need attention to both. along those lines, i want to just mention briefly in solidarity with the, with the north dakota sioux, the -- yes,
2:25 pm
the standing rock sioux in north dakota who are trying to protect their land as another disenfranchised group, another, you know, people of color who are trying to save their water supply, their traditional lands, as well as the climate. we've always relied really on indigenous people to be the caretakers of our climate and of our ecosystem, and they are basically resisting now another very toxic pipeline of the worst kind of fuel that's going to run over their water supply and put their lands very much at risk. and i just want to stand in solidarity with them. there were about -- there are about 1000 native americans that have gathered now at their -- at their tribal lands in an effort to resist the pipeline. and what they're doing is trying to help prevent the next
2:26 pm
katrina, the next super storm sandy, the next louisiana floods down the line because they're only getting worse and more frequent and more devastating. they exemplify, i think, the kind of courage and the foresight that we need and the kind of community spirit that we need in order to stop this crisis from barreling down on us, which it is right now. thank you. >> one question from darren. >> hi, dr. stein. jill stein: hi. >> when we spoke yesterday, you talked about the need for a truth and reconciliation commission. jill stein: yes. >> and i wondered if you could expand on that? jill stein: great, thank you. and i think this pertains not only to the issue of environmental racism, to the issue of police violence, to the issue of xenophobia as well for that matter, that we are a country really that's armed and ready to shoot, you know? and we are the most violent
2:27 pm
country in the world with the most shootings and violent deaths at the hands of police but beyond the hands of police, as well. and we have a violence problem which goes hand-in-hand with our problem of fear and mistrust and hate. unfortunately, we're seeing the -- those flames being, you know, fanned right now in this election. the flames of hate and fear are being intensified, where we need to be moving in the opposite direction. we need to be having a facilitated discussion now. we need to be able to have a frank discussion about race, about the legacy of racism, about in particular, you know, many people say, "oh, slavery, it ended." well, it ended, but then it became lynching, and then it became jim crow. and then it became red-lining. and then it became segregation,
2:28 pm
which is coming back full-force, the war on drugs, mass incarceration, and then this police violence, which is really just the tip of an iceberg. so, you know, there's, there's a deep underlying problem here. and it's not only the culture of policing and the broken windows policing that creates very aggressive policing. the culture of that has to be changed. and the training of our police has to be changed. communities need to be put in charge of their police instead of having police in charge of their communities. so, you know, we need citizen review panels that have the power of subpoena and so on. we need to be able to hold perpetrators accountable through investigations of every death at the hands of police. so there are things we need to do about that violence. but we also need a truth and reconciliation commission. and in my view, we also need reparations to address this historic and compounded burden of economic disparities. so that violence is not only at
2:29 pm
the hands of an occupying police force. violence is also taking place economically right now. we know that just living while black confers a seven-year loss of life. if you compound that with poor education, which also tends to run in communities of color, it's another seven years loss of life. so there are real consequences to the commutative historic burden. you know, and it's not just african americans. we need to look at the burden of discrimination, fear and hate against people of color, immigrants, latinos, muslims, native americans and so on. we need to facilitate a discussion at the community level that includes art and music and storytelling, and the things that enable us to humanize each other, to each other. this isn't rocket science. there is a whole, you know, method for doing this, for helping us build trust and make friends and become a common
2:30 pm
community, which we must do if we are to solve any of the problems that we're currently struggling with. thank you very much. >> we are just about done. it is 11:00, so i thank you all for coming. if you have not gotten a card, please come get one. thank you. jill stein: we appreciate your attention. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]

26 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on